I'm now resuming reading from the memo: “But then the publisher added that he wanted
Frankel to succeed me not on or near the date of my mandatory retirement of May 1, 1978, but
on January 1, 1977, sixteen months earlier and only nine months from now. This did take me
totally by surprise, and I said I did not think this was a good idea at all and could not
understand the necessity for it. There seemed to me to be plenty for Mr. Frankel to do until
my retirement date, both in helping unify Sunday and news departments and in fact, in
travel, writing, and generally preparing himself for the job for which however capable he was,
he had no prior experience. The publisher told me that this was only a suggestion that he was
making, that it was to be considered by me in the nature of a “non-conversation.” I'm now
interrupting the memo to simply put in here verbally that I still so distinctly remember his
use of that word in his talk to me, a “non-conversation.”

That is -- I'm now reading from the memo again -- “nothing definitive as to the date and that I
should talk this over with the one person in the building who had any knowledge of what his
desires and intentions were in this respect, namely Sydney Gruson. The clear inference was
that, although my successor had been definitely determined, the timing of my replacement
was still wide open and in fact, as I assumed, no force would be exercised.”

I think I have to read a little bit of the next paragraph, of the next two paragraphs in this
memo: “To the best of my recollection, there was no mention in this conversation of any
changes of staff other than my own, although there might well have been a comment by the
publisher that Frankel would want to bring in one or two of his own people and that one or
two or at the most three of my present staff, whom I had been trying for years to move off the
editorial board, would indeed be transferred or otherwise removed.”